| XBK Chat (unofficial archive) A meeting place for past members of Brahma Kumaris
FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups
Profile You have no new messages Log out
GOD - a 'who' or a 'what? Goto page 1, 2 Next
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> Any and Everything
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author | Message
--- | ---
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:48 am Post subject: GOD - a 'who' or a 'what? |
Is GOD a 'who' or a 'what'........or something more subtle than either of these? love wahl
gyaniwasi Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 167 |
Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:12 pm Post subject: |
Thanks for opening this topic Whal. Many years ago in my youth, before my coming to R.Y. , I was preoccupied with it and came across a beautiful little poem in a magazine published by mystics. I cannot now recall all of it but I remember it was an expression of awe. It said something like:
Quote:
What is God? You ask/ ask me about a child new born/ or an old man crossing a street/ ask me about a bird in flight or waves crashing on the sea/ask me about a tree, old twisted and bent/ but can you ask me still ‘What is God?
These may not all be the same or exact words but I try to convey the mystic’s sense of awe inspired by human life and nature. This was an expression of the universal presence of God. When I came to gyan that understanding was changed by a different kind of awe, one that first struck the mind with an impression of purity emanating from the RY Centre and its sisters - and later in Madhuban by the kind of ‘presence’ described by Frank under “Anomalies” - and the intellect by the corresponding power and simplicity of what seemed a complete knowledge. There, I learnt that God had descended to earth to reveal Himself and declared that sentiments such as those expressed in that mystic’s poem had got it all wrong: ‘Some said that He was present in all human beings, others that he was omnipresent – existing even in stones and vermin – while all along He is just a soul, pin-point of light and energy who plays the key role in an eternal world drama that lasts 5000 years etc. etc.’ You know the details. Yet, in one of her classes Mohinibhen commented on a murli point that in the path of (Hindi) bhakti it is well known that God is referred to as “Vidhan, Vidhi and Vidata” meaning The Law, The Law Giver, and the Law Keeper (the translation from Hindi may not be in that order). This has always struck me as very similar to the opening of that well known Christian Gospel of John: “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God…. And the Word was made flesh …” Consider this in relation to the unanswered question of ‘Who created Drama?’ The point I’m making is that both in the path of bhakti and in gyan, God is understood to be the universal or cosmic force or expression of life who – as the Gita declares – periodically incarnates on earth. Mohinibhen’s comment was made with reference to Shiv Baba, yet, in the original knowledge He is said to have made a disclaimer that separates Himself from the rest of ‘creation’ in a Drama whose physical substance is eternal and uncreated by way of identical repetition of Laws which – according to Mohinibhen – are an integral part of his identity. The importance of this point is that, when convenient, Shiv Baba is identical with the universal concept of an omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient Being humans call God; but generally – in BK knowledge – He is identified by a role he plays in an ‘eternal drama of identical repetition’. The Chinese sage Lao Tse alludes to the Tao (which, linguistically, seems to have several interpretations – somewhat like homonyms) out of which proceeds the “10,000 things” of creation. For me this is equivalent to the Word/Logos/Christ, Vidhan, Vidhi, and Vidata. How then do we reconcile this with the diverse cultural expressions – including the BK’s ‘Shiv Baba’? Personally, I’ve come to believe that we are met at the point of our spiritual evolution. If the best we can conceive of God is through the expression of Krishna, then we are accommodated; if through Christ, then likewise and now, if through the incorporeal point-of-light image of Shiva then so be it. I have seen a Muslim slogan say: ‘If you take one step towards Allah He will take a thousand to meet you.’ At this point of my evolution, I think God is both a personality and a force or power. I believe He is a force or power of sublime order based on my observations of the Earth’s life and the apparent order of the planets and stars in their phenomena. I also believe He is a personality, the comprehension of whom is beyond our limited human capability and that in us are reflections of his qualities – love, intelligence, bliss etc. The problem with us as humans is that, in our hubris, we try to define Him (no offence meant to gender sensitivity) within our limitations. Yet, I think, He tolerates it if He sees it leading ultimately to our sublimation or compatibility with His Being. That is perhaps why He is silent in the midst of so many religions. There is a beautiful passage in the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ which explains Man’s capability quite clearly. The scene is a meeting of the seven sages of the world in Alexandria where Jesus is present (this was during the ‘silent years’ of his life not recorded in the official versions of the Bible). The time is at the beginning of the Age of Preparation or the astrological ‘Piscean Age’. According to that Gospel, seven sages meet at the beginning of each Age to determine seven postulates that would be best for the spiritual evolution of Man. The first to speak is the Chinese, Meng-tse, the oldest. Here is some of what he says:
Quote:
Man is not far enough advanced to live by faith; he cannot comprehend the things his eyes see not. He is yet a child, and during all the coming age he must be taught by pictures, symbols, rites, and forms. His god must be a human God; he cannot see a God by faith. …. The age that follows this will be the age of man, the age of faith. In that blest age the human race will see without the aid of carnal eyes; will hear the soundless sound; will know the Spirit-God. ….And man cannot originate; he builds by patterns that he sees; ….
I’ve selected this excerpt to make the point that we still look for human expressions of God. The Christians look to the image of Jesus to understand the “Christ” expression of God; Hindus look to Krishna or other deities; Brahma Kumaris understand God through his physical expression in Prajapita Brahma (that’s the importance of meditating before the translight also) and now PBKs seek to understand Him through VDD. The ‘age of faith’ that Meng-tse refers to is supposed to be the present age – the ‘Age of Aquarius’ - but it seems we have not fully evolved into it since we are at its beginning. It is true that in RY we were being taught to ‘see without the aid of carnal eyes’ through our visualization of that Point-of-Light in Paramdham but the earthly institution(s) supposedly founded by that point of light has/have fallen into the same pattern of relying on ‘pictures, symbols, rites, and forms.’ I guess at the end of it all we still long for that personal experience of intimate relationship with God and now, with an expanding knowledge and understanding of a holographic universe, we might have to accommodate a ‘knowing’ of Him not just as a Who or What but as both, streaming through all creation of which we are a part. The difference of this age, I guess, will be in our ‘knowing’ this through experience rather than mere words or ideas. If you have emerged from RY with an experience of this ‘knowing’ untainted by doubt or contradictions then count yourself extremely lucky and hope that the rest of us might one day be surprised by that mystic awe. Gy _________________ "Those were the days my friend ...."
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 2:07 am Post subject: |
Hello Gy, I always look forward to your postings and this reply has not let me down.
Quote:
The Christians look to the image of Jesus to understand the “Christ” expression of God; Hindus look to Krishna or other deities; Brahma Kumaris understand God through his physical expression in Prajapita Brahma (that’s the importance of meditating before the translight also) and now PBKs seek to understand Him through VDD. The ‘age of faith’ that Meng-tse refers to is supposed to be the present age – the ‘Age of Aquarius’ - but it seems we have not fully evolved into it since we are at its beginning.
So, maybe a good starting point now, would be to focus on what we, actually know, as individual souls, to be real.........the expression rather than the source. For me that would be the many experiences of a pure atmosphere in which Loveful and Peaceful vibrations have been created.........'om shanti'
Quote:
I also believe He is a personality, the comprehension of whom is beyond our limited human capability and that in us are reflections of his qualities – love, intelligence, bliss etc
This is a reality. Meditation is the starting point to access this soundless sound/vibration of LOVE............ with love, wahl
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:04 am Post subject: |
Good morning Gy,
Quote:
Yet, in one of her classes Mohinibhen commented on a murli point that in the path of (Hindi) bhakti it is well known that God is referred to as “Vidhan, Vidhi and Vidata” meaning The Law, The Law Giver, and the Law Keeper ...........Mohinibhen’s comment was made with reference to Shiv Baba, yet, in the original knowledge He is said to have made a disclaimer that separates Himself from the rest of ‘creation’ in a Drama whose physical substance is eternal and uncreated by way of identical repetition of Laws which – according to Mohinibhen – are an integral part of his identity. The importance of this point is that, when convenient, Shiv Baba is identical with the universal concept of an omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient Being humans call God; but generally – in BK knowledge – He is identified by a role he plays in an ‘eternal drama of identical repetition’
. Please could you clarify something for me? I may be misunderstanding you but, the text marked in bold............are you saying that this is the Bk point of view? I am not sure how you come to this conclusion? I don't see The Law, The Law Giver, and the Law Keeper as meaning omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. The aspect of 'God' being the Law is a very intersting point to look at, especially if we can put aside all of our preconceptions of who or what 'God' is. with love wahl
ex-london Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 131 |
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:23 am Post subject: |
wahl wrote:
Good morning Gy, I don't see The Law, The Law Giver, and the Law Keeper as meaning omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient.
Just a philosophical thought to the latter; if we start with the concept that the Supreme Being is " like us " in that he is a personality but then that he is immersed in an eternal statelessness, where and when is it? Now that reads as an obscure question but it alludes to our - as similar beings - temporal, subjective and conditional state in matter. Bound by matter our consciousness is bound by dualistic, spacial, temporal differentiations; time, distance, relationship, knowledge, lack, up, down, beginning, end etc. When we start to think of absolute states, our brains burst and cannot perceive it! You are trying to use matter to graps that which existed and exists before and after, inside and all around matter. Where there is one absolute state there must and can only exist at the same time and point all absolute states; therefore the infinite with eternal and the infinitesimal. Now, ask your self the question where is the inifinite or infinitesimal; when is the eternal? It cannot be can it? Infinite or even infinitesimal cannot be relational [ e.g. over here ... over there ... ] because they is everywhere already and always for eternity were. The eternal cannot be coming on its way in 5 minutes time because it has also already existed for eternity. So where is their God in relationship to us right at this monent? If he is in an infinite space then he must be at no distance from all of us at any time, i.e. omnipresent. He must seen and therefore know even experience everything as he is present at every moment with, in and around all of us for all time, i.e. ominscient. As for omnipotented, well, I give that one a miss but to an extend the same rule applies, to an absolute there can be no opposite, subjective or temporal state, hence on one hand the omnipotent and on the otherhand the eternal Void. Both the same. No such thing as power or powerlessness. I think we must wrestle with a mind that visualises God / Shiva like a goldfish in a goldfish bowl of Paramdham, scoot back and forward to peer out at us. It is not helped by the Brahma Kumari illustrations of one off a contained eggshape cosmos that we can sit and look at. Did you ever stop to ask what is outside of the egg? or where all the other time eggs were at this time?
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:04 am Post subject: |
Hi ex-london
Quote:
if we start with the concept that the Supreme Being is " like us " in that he is a personality
I don't think I can start with this concept............for all of the reasons that you go on to explain. To try to rationalise 'God' using the very gross medium of thought and logic is pointless. So, that is why I am suggesting that we start with what we know to be real. For me it has been the experience of a Supreme energy. Whether this is the expression of 'God' as a personality or not is not really relevant because when I try to analyse it with logic and theories, then it just makes it more elusive. This is why I think that meditation is so important. It is the process that allows us to perceive in a more subtle way. It leads to a more abstract perception. George Harrison said, "Listen to the colours of your dreams". A scientist would approach this advice very differently from a yogi master! with love wahl
gyaniwasi Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 167 |
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:33 am Post subject: |
Hi guys, Sorry about the long gap Whal but the very mundane matters of business resulted in my overlooking your response in the limited time I have available to check the site. You say:
Quote:
To try to rationalise 'God' using the very gross medium of thought and logic is pointless. So, that is why I am suggesting that we start with what we know to be real.
The problem, wahl, is that as humans we seem to be at a stage of evolution or development where we cannot escape being rational. All of our discussions are expressions of rationality. What seems to happen is that we are essentially limited by the level of our awareness or consciousness which in turn determines how we respond or react to experiences. To someone smoking marijuana and going on a 'trip' to ancient India the experience might be dismissed as an hallucination; to someone else it might represent proof or insight to a pre-natal existence. Some of us can only understand life from a materialistic point of view; others see it from a spiritual point of view. The ant, considered from a physical point of view, might find it impossible to conceive a phenomenon like the earth circling the sun. They burnt people at the stake for that level of rationality. The point I'm making is that while experience is inescapable, it is natural for the human mind to seek to understand it and communicate it - whether by poetry, doctrine or zen. The problem with the BK experience is that, while it seems authentic, the rationality accompanying it, that is, BK knowledge taken as a whole, has an inauthentic ring and the normal rational human mind by which we life cannot reconcile this with the rest of our existence. And this schism is difficult to accept since we are, naturally, rational beings (even trying to 'see method in madness') About the bold print: that is my observation from living with the BKs. I think ex-london has clarified the point - as you acknowledge. Thanks ex-l. Always good to read you guys. Take care. Gy _________________ "Those were the days my friend ...."
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:36 am Post subject: |
Hi Gy,
Quote:
we are essentially limited by the level of our awareness or consciousness which in turn determines how we respond or react to experiences.
This is true, but don't you think that we also have the ability to raise the level of our awareness...........in other words make effort (through meditation, diet etc) to develop a more subtle consciousness and inevitably a higher perception? Is this not your experience Gy? with love wahl
ex-london Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 131 |
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 10:31 pm Post subject: |
wahl wrote:
Hi Gy,
Quote:
we are essentially limited by the level of our awareness or consciousness which in turn determines how we respond or react to experiences.
This is true, but don't you think that we also have the ability to raise the level of our awareness...........in other words make effort (through meditation, diet etc) to develop a more subtle consciousness and inevitably a higher perception?
Perhaps in our evolution, I hope, we are learning to use a " new organ " ... a more refined level of intuition and the whole B.K. experience is just another lesson, another stopping off point and not the destination. But the appliance of logic and rationalism to the material and non-material world has to be essential.
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:26 am Post subject: |
Hi ex-london,
Quote:
But the appliance of logic and rationalism to the material and non-material world has to be essential.
Yes and no. I would like to give music as an example. In order to learn to play a piece of music it is necessary to apply logical thought and discipline. You need to learn how to play the notes on the piano and to interpret the black marks on the musical manuscript. So, lets assume that all that logical groundwork has been done. Once I am confident that I can play the notes without having to 'think' too much, in others words, after lots of practice, the technical aspect has become second nature to me, then I am in a position to the interpret and the express myself through the music. At this point, my consciousness need to become more subtle and taking over from the disciplined logical thought. The head needs to make room for the heart. Of course, you could say that we still use logic and analysis in order to put some 'expression' into the music, you could say......"well in bar 19 you need to reduce the volume to so many decibels and if you could also speed up the tempo by a quarter in bar 56, then that should give the desired effect of expressing melancholy". I have known musicians to do this and somehow they always end up without an audience. The head has acquired the knowledge (the appliance of logic and rationalism to the material) and then the heart, the subtle energy of the soul is allowed the space to makes the music come alive. I don't think this is a question of evolution..........we don't have to wait for our " new organ " to develop. We are it. We are souls. Oh my God................Baba was right all along! ..........maybe it was just the human beings that misled us ex BKs a little off target. with love wahl
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:12 am Post subject: |
I need to learn how to play the notes = knowledge then to express myself through the music = yoga with love wahl
ex-london Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 131 |
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:45 pm Post subject: |
wahl wrote:
I need to learn how to play the notes = knowledge then to express myself through the music = yoga
With respect, that means absolutely nothing. It might be satisfying in a romantic or poetic way But what actually is the latter, what you call the yoga but might actually be something else all together; especially if by the former you mean the inconsistent product the B.K.s call " The Knowledge ". In B.K.speak, what I could be talking about are the Powers of Judgement and Discrimination. What happens when you apply them to the concrete statement of facts as given to you by the B.K.s and the " facts " dont add up? You know, there is a way or " proclaiming " something in a certain tone of voice that the Indian really love. Short little ditties, often rhyming, said in a certain way, often with a shake of the head or a flick of a hand gesture that seems to pass as unquestionable " Wisdom ". And it is a habit that often passes into the Brahma Kumari Organisation. For the Westerner it is cute and entertaining for a while and many get sucked into when they enter into the B.K.'s Raja Yoga, adopting even a Hindi tone of voice but really, if you are honest about it, the statements really dont mean anything.
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:25 am Post subject: |
Quote:
With respect, that means absolutely nothing.
It would have been more accurate if you had said that it means absolutely nothing to you. It means everything to me. Forget BK for a minute. All the debates and dogmas, who is right, who is wrong..........this just keeps us grounded in the heavy concrete world of thinking and analysis and, ultimately, they lead absolutely nowhere. It appears to broaden the intellect but, in reality it shrinks the mind to the point that we become incapable of remembering how to feel anything at all. Yoga.........replace this word for Love. I had a very tough day yesterday and it was nearly as tough as the day before. Tough days remind us that we have forgotten about Love ('God'). Soul consciousness means being immersed in Love. It is the natural expression of the soul..........every soul. with Love Wahl
howiemac Joined: 18 May 2005 Posts: 142 Location: Scotland |
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:59 am Post subject: |
well said Wahl.
wahl wrote:
Quote:
With respect, that means absolutely nothing.
It would have been more accurate if you had said that it means absolutely nothing to you. It means everything to me.
speaking as a musician, it touched a real chord (pun intended) with me also when I read your post: an apt analogy.
wahl wrote:
Soul consciousness means being immersed in Love. It is the natural expression of the soul..........every soul. l
satish Joined: 28 Nov 2004 Posts: 100 |
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:07 pm Post subject: |
Wahl said
Quote:
Soul consciousness means being immersed in Love. It is the natural expression of the soul..........every soul.
Well said above words. We usually act other way to this like expecting too much in life to happen instead of working on it. However I guess life is full of love if we have nothing left to expect but lot to give. thanks satish[/quote]
Display posts from previous:
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> Any and Everything | All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2
| You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group